With the Super Bowl just over a week away, you may be looking to fill that sports void with something fast-paced, energetic, and competitive.  No, no, not the Olympics.  Not world-class athletes at the top of their game representing a host of countries around the globe in efforts to bridge peoples and cultures in a harmonious and peaceful spirit.  No.  I’m talking about the recently formed basketball league featuring “natural born United States citizens with both parents of Caucasian race.”  What, was watching Whites play basketball not the first thing that came to mind for something fast-paced, energetic, and competitive?  Then according to league commissioner Don “Moose” Lewis, you have little appreciation for fundamental basketball.  You schmuck.

While I have my own thoughts and opinions surrounding the All-American Basketball Alliance (AABA), this post is about something bigger than this unimaginable and outrageous abomination.  It is about standing up to intolerable thoughts, opinions, and actions.  Intolerable people and institutions.  Yes, you can ignore them and hope they go away.  But the AABA isn’t a pimple, a temper tantrum, or a parking ticket.  It is a group of individuals that calls into question the assumption that racism, xenophobia, and other prejudices are really more subtle now than they used to be.  Can you imagine what the world might be like if people didn’t make a stand against slavery or segregation?  What if the world didn’t pressure South Africa to end apartheid or Libya to condemn terrorists?  Then other acts against humanity, like anti-gay bills in Uganda, genocide in Darfur, and repression of Tibetans, will simply continue.

I was reminded of the importance of making your voice heard when I received a letter from the mayor of Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, one of the cities targeted by the AABA for potentially hosting a team.  I am encouraged by the response and hope that by cities refusing to participate in this ludicrous league, such horrible acts will not even be able to begin.  But people must first say “no” for Mr. Lewis and his supporters to understand there in fact is no market for his all-White basketball league, for silence is acceptance and not speaking up on your own behalf means someone else will.

“Dear Ms. Chang:

Thank you for your e-mail regarding the so-called All-American Basketball Alliance. I have checked with Town staff as to whether we have received any contact from this organization and it has been confirmed that we have not.

It is ironic that just five days after celebrating Martin Luther King Day, we have to read of this so-called league. The formation of the league is cynical at best and unwelcome here or anywhere.

Thank you for informing the Town of this information.

Sincerely,

Thomas D. Peeples, Mayor
Town of Hilton Head Island, South Carolina”

Links

Read a humorous, yet very serious commentary on the AABA

Read a news story about Augusta, another city targeted by the AABA

Sign the petition and encourage other mayors to oppose AABA teams in their cities

Carbon trading, at first glance, seems quite simple.  For each ton of carbon you produce, you buy a credit that represents a ton of carbon saved by someone else.  Utilizing trees as “carbon sinks,” which absorb more carbon than they release, is becoming a popular way to neutralize your carbon footprint.  But not all carbon is create equal.  Although there is an active pool consisting of carbon that freely moves between forests, oceans, and air, carbon emissions from fossil fuels are inert and therefore add to the active pool.

The complexities of the market and measuring carbon also present challenges to the concept of carbon trading.  For example, there is currently no central trading platform and it is inherently difficult to estimate and monitor the contribution of activities to carbon emissions or reductions.  The cost of a ton of carbon dioxide equivalent is also significantly lower now than ever, where credits historically valued at $15-$20 per ton are now less than a dollar.  Many companies report that such low-cost offsets would discourage them from investing in technology to reduce their own emissions.  These are pressing issues that need to be addressed as offsets lacking credibility and discouraging innovation would undermine the goal of carbon trading.

Perhaps the strongest arguments against using forests as carbon offsets are the effects on communities.  Many people indigenous to forested areas are not consulted in land use agreements, or worse, their land rights are violated.  Such agreements lock up the use of land for years, making it available to overseas companies for emissions rights and unavailable to meet the needs of local peoples, and often result in the migration of deforestation from one region to another.  Taking into account the price of maintaining and protecting forests also leads one to question the fairness of trading one ton of carbon emission for one dollar.

Carbon trading, though being a compromise on the part of companies and government, is an imperfect, impractical, and unjust solution to climate change.  Until market and scientific standards are determined, countries and communities are fairly reimbursed for their natural and human resources, and there is a demonstrated impact on emissions and sustainable development, carbon trading, particularly in respect to trees, is simply another distraction that will ultimately harm all inhabitants of the earth, not just those disenfranchised by the system.

The bottom line

Put nicely: Utilizing forests as carbon offsets, as it stands today, is an ineffective way to reduce emissions created by the burning of fossil fuels.

Put plainly: Buying trees is quickly becoming another way to colonize the resources of the developed world, making those most vulnerable pay upfront for a debt deferred by those most wealthy.

What can I do?

I want to learn more!

Where did you find this information?

Day 1: Not much exciting to report here.  Eighteen hour bus ride from Cape Town to Harrismith.  With only an emergency toilet on board.

Day 2: Tugela Falls hike in the Amphitheatre section of the Drakensberg. Terribly foggy and a bit drizzly, resulting in some slippery conditions for hiking. Tugela Falls is the world’s second highest waterfall, which I shamefully cannot confirm visually due to the fog. Still a beautiful landscape as far as I can see, with some great hiking due to the varied terrain.

Day 3: Tour of Lesotho, a small landlocked country in South Africa that claims the title of the world’s only country that lies entirely above 1,000 meters (3,300 feet) in elevation. We first toured a school, and then embarked on a hike, where we also got rained on. After some treacherous hiking back (think gushing rivers for trails) to our vehicles, we met with a sangoma, or traditional healer.

Day 4: Rest day that consisted of visiting the sauna, hot tub, kitchen, bar, and surrounding areas of the backpackers. All while surrounded by the beautiful Amphitheatre! Rough indeed!

Day 5: Hike around the Ampitheatre, which included Gudu Falls, a short episode of stalking by baboons, many closed trails due to severe weather conditions, and a chat with a fellow hiker from Seattle. The world is a small place! Concluded by the sauna, hot tub, and bar.

Day 6: A day of ups and downs. Leaving the backpackers later than anticipated, meaning less time waiting in town for the bus: up. Sitting in a bar listening to Afrikaans country music for 5 hours: down. Catching a glimpse of some rugby games over beer and warm food: up. Attempted bag theft while waiting at bus stop: down. Long bus ride back to Cape Town and conclusion of holiday: down. Great company on the bus and some sci-fi movies on the way back: up.

All in all, it was a fantastic trip and a much needed break from “real life.” Not that I’ve had to deal with that much since returning to Cape Town considering we have (yes, count them) four public holidays this month!

News reports in South Africa portrayed the crash as an accident involving the collision of a US aid truck and the Tsvangirai’s vehicle. The truck driver reportedly sideswiped the vehicle, causing it to overturn numerous times. The truck was immediately impounded by Zimbabwean authorities and the driver arrested under charges of culpable homicide. Investigation suggests the driver fell asleep at the wheel.

News reports elsewhere, however, differed. Those from BBC and CNN did not reveal until a later date that the truck was that of USAID. The specific USAID program is said to be jointly funded by the UK and US. Additionally, such articles fail to mention the driver of the truck is facing criminal charges. US sources also state the truck may have hit a rock and that traffic accidents in Zimbabwe are unfortunately very common.

This is a dilemma for me. As tragic as this event is, I realize it may in fact help facilitate the rebuilding of a broken land. At the same time, I wonder in whose favor it is to focus on the positive, as opposed to the cause of the accident itself. Either way, I suppose the best thing I can do at this point is maintain my civic responsibility by informing myself and applying a critical lens.

Here is a small sampling of the news stories addressing the death of Mrs. Tsvangirai.

6 March Zimbabwe PM’s wife dies in crash (BBC)

6 March Tsvangirai’s car hit by US truck – report (South Africa)

7 March Official: Tsvangirai believes fatal crash was deliberate (CNN)

9 March Tsvangirai says crash an accident (BBC)

10 March Truck driver faces charges over death of PM’s wife (Australia)

10 March Zimbabweans bid farewell to Mrs. Tsvangirai (South Africa)

11 March Thousands attend funeral for Zimbabwe prime minister’s wife (CNN)

12 March Zimbabwe’s funeral diplomacy (BBC)

Expats must act quickly after ruling

IEC ready for overseas voters

Opposition parties rejoice with expats

South African expats vote upheld

In light of the media coverage surrounding the decision of whether citizens located overseas should vote, I began to contemplate this question myself. I participated in the election in November via absentee ballot and am still currently registered with my former place of residence in Oregon. Although I feel very strongly that I should have a voice in national issues, I found myself stumbling through the local issues that often dealt with schools, firefighters, and city maintenance. I also began to wonder what it means to be a citizen of a country I do not reside in as I am currently ruled by a set of laws foreign to me. Is it different if it is a temporary residence as opposed to being an expatriate?

What are your thoughts? Should citizens who are overseas be allowed to vote? Why or why not, and in what cases?